Peter Gleick thinks (or pretends) CO2 can melt traffic lights

Peter Gleick — infamous for using deception to steal documents “for The Cause” (see fakegate) — tweeted that it was getting hotter every year. He attached a picture of melting traffic lights. “Hot enough for you?” How good is this man’s physics?

This is a wider picture of events near to the traffic lights that melted in Kuwait.

That’s what I thought of twitter when I first heard about it. It all seemed a load of vapid nonsense.

An interesting quote attributed to Peter Thiel (who gave PayPal and Facebook their first venture capital) was his reaction to being asked about the state of technology today and what’s wrong with it. He essentially said:“We wanted flying cars, instead we got 140 characters.”

The alternative point of view is that “Twitter is infrastructure”. In other words, the technology can be used well or poorly, and “poorly” means trying to use it for stuff it can’t do well, such as attempting any amount of meaningful communication in a ‘tweet’. It’s okay as an event notification stream indexed by subjects with a shortened link to the real content. ( recent e.g. #PRISM.)

Twitter is okay for discovering people via their interests, whereas RSS Feeds do a better job of moving summary information. The only drawback with RSS is its “pull”/polling based messaging, whereas Twitter pushes messages to subscribers immediately. You could say that twitter is another way to figure out whose blogs and RSS feeds to subscribe.

Lets not forget this is just one example of thousands that we could point to that demonstrates the criminality of the AGW promoters. The mere fact that this type of behaviour is condoned or in most cases cheered by the faithful shows just how delusional they really are.

The depths of human stupidity has not been reached yet and i suspect this type of work will be merely the entree as teh movement continues to go more and more pear shaped.

Heheh. One would assume that the politically adept would have to be sound judges of character and wise to the ways of the world. The politically adept should not end up being conned out of their pants. Either Fraser was never politically adept or else after losing the election he had decided he had nothing left to lose and to just… throw in the towel – bar one thankfully!

Hero?? I’d never heard of Gleick until Gleickgate. He was never influential in public opinion on climate change.
The oldest reference to him I can find on WUWT is an excerpt from this article in 2008.

Was he made a hero for exposing Heartland’s payroll and strategy? Because they can’t consider him a hero while at the same time be unwilling to defend the action that made him a hero.
I’d say he’s not considered a hero even by warmists (perhaps only because he got caught).

Perhaps I’m not being uncharitable enough. Maybe warmists secretly approve of intentional deception, but only if it’s for The Cause of saving the planet. They can’t be drawn into debate about that because they have to remain studiously ignorant of the fraudulent basis of The Cause.

Remarks by President Obama at Young African Leaders Initiative Town Hall
University of Johannesburg-Soweto Johannesburg, South Africa
Ultimately, if you think about all the youth that everybody has mentioned here in Africa, if everybody is raising living standards to the point where everybody has got a car and everybody has got air conditioning, and everybody has got a big house, well, the planet will boil over — unless we find new ways of producing energy. And tomorrow, or the next day, when I visit Tanzania, I’m actually going to be going to a power plant to focus on the need for electrification, but the need to do it in an environmentally sound way…http://www.uj.ac.za/EN/Newsroom/News/Pages/Remarks-by-President-Obama-at-Young-African-Leaders-Initiative-Town-Hall.aspx

that’s a metaphor for:

2 July: Washington Post: Brad Plumer: A closer look at Obama’s $7 billion plan to bring electricity to Africa
On Sunday, Obama promised $7 billion in financial support over the next five years to bring “electricity access” to 20 million new households in Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Liberia, Nigeria and Tanzania, as well as help countries like Mozambique develop their oil and gas resources.

The money will mostly come from existing U.S. development banks, so it doesn’t require new spending from Congress. For instance, the Export-Import Bank, a government-backed lender, will finance $5 billion in projects by U.S. companies…

“For reaching urban centers and powering industrial zones, you’ll likely need traditional large-scale power plants. And current U.S. rules are keeping businesses out of that area.”…

What counts as “electricity access”? Access to electricity means different things to different people — and there’s no clear definition. In some parts of Africa, it might mean enough to light two light bulbs and charge a cell phone. Here in the United States, access to electricity obviously means much, much more…

Roger Pielke Jr., an environmental studies professor at the University of Colorado, has pointed out that the international community’s definition of “modern energy access” tends to be quite scant — it means providing people with a mere 2.2 percent of the energy that the average American uses…

How much money would it take to make sure everyone had access to electricity? The answer is a lot. Let’s put Obama’s proposal in context. Right now, 1.2 billion people around the world are still stuck in the dark — with about 550 million of those in Africa…

The report (World Bank and International Energy Agency) estimated that it would likely take between $120 billion and $160 billion per year over and above existing levels to bring energy access to everyone by 2030. (And, again, that’s a relatively stingy definition of “energy access.”)…

India Population 1.24 Billion (Oz X 56) Power to the Residential Sector 70TWH (Same as Oz)

Even if those who do have any access to electrical power in those 2 huge Countries consume only a fraction of what we do at the Residential level, that means (conservatively) possibly half of China and two thirds of India have no power at all at the Residential level, so there’s 1.4 Billion alone, plus Africa, plus the rest of the still developing World, so that figure could be as high as 2.5 Billion.

And the environmentalists answer to this is that we go back and join them there.

Now can you see why that will never happen.

The vast populace in our Developed World just will not stand for that, no matter what they are told, and woebetide any Politician even suggesting something like that.

Take China of the list of ‘undevelped countries’ Unless you can explain how roads, and buildings are built at 50x the rate than elsewhere and trains go at 5x the speed as developed nations (except EU and Japan and theyre on the way to eat that!) ..esp the USA where trains are non existent (for passengers). Power consumption in China feeds its massive industrial sector.

You must be the “Alternative Real Universe”. On a recent trip to the USofA I used the AMTRAK system from New York to Willmington and back and from New York to Montreal. Fast, clean, efficient with friendly attentive staff so please tell me if passenger trains in the USofA are non-existant what I was travelling on. And spend some time looking at the sites Mark D has referred you to.

“woebetide any Politician even suggesting something like that.” Isn’t that exactly what Cameron is doing to UK citizens? And are they up in arms or even aware that they are headed for electrical brown-outs? Well sadly no unless of course they get that cross channel power cable finished in time to suck in all that loverly French nuclear power thus buggering further the UK balance of payments.
Our politicians continue to fail to appreciate that the availibility of inexpensive electricity is and should be a democratic “right” along with clean water, safe streets, education etc. They are monumentally failing democracy and we tax payers.

Interesting he highlighted Tanzania. I was there several times 4-5 years ago for work. Whilst driving away from Dar es Salam, a city of about 4 million, every second car or truck heading towards the city is carrying numerous bags of charcoal, generally all over the roof. Our driver explained that even in this, the largest city of the country the electricity system is so basic that if you are lucky enough to have access, it will only run a few lights and a refrigerator, again if your well off enough and the charcoal is for all your cooking.
As you get further out into the country you see the incredible destruction of their forests to supply this charcoal, really environmentally friendly – not.

Thanks for the angle Tony. Based on this, I thought I’d have a quick approx. comparative look at Tanzania and NZ.

In summary, Tanzania with ten times the population of NZ has 10% the kWh consumption of NZ. It’s sure going to require some pretty adept ETS/World Bank/UN “re-distribution” to level the playing field and keep us all (except the MSM and carbon elite) in power poverty.

After fact checking i think you will find there was a fault with the traffic signals computer system and that car sat at the lights for a very long time coupled with the fact that there was absolutely no breeze at the time meant the car became engulfed with CO2 emissions which in turn caused the temperature of the atmosphere around the car to increase at a rapid rate.

At which time a tipping point was reached and the car spontaneously erupted in flames thus causing the traffic light to melt.

Damn it i cant see your cat from here but i do know a dog when i see one BS and that aint no dog, i dont know what it is but it aint no dog thats for sure it looks more like Alf suffering from myxomatosis.

Im waiting for someone to call the 19 firefighters that tragically lost their lives in Arizona “the first direct victims of climate change” Obama all but spelled it out when talking about them recently. Everytime I think its safe to remove my foil hat, the believers just ramp up the nonsense another notch. Obama with his “the planet will boil over”…. man Im lost for words…

It is frighting to think that with regard to AGW the President of the United States and his advisers apparently take no time to discern and analyse the basic facts, or if they did they did, then they cannot understand it, or choose to bs about it.

It’s frightening because ultimately this is a just an invisible gas that fertilises plants, yet every day the same POTUS is making decisions about war, sanctions, killing people with drones, and the printing of money where the complexity of understanding those issues compared to understanding the merits or otherwise of AGW is probably 500 times more difficult.

If he has it so wrong with AGW facts and policy, just imagine how wrong he has Eygypt, Iran, North Korea, Russia, nuclear proliferation, debt, money supply, immigration, tax and health care.

The so called leaders can’t even run their own lives let alone the whole country. ALL they can do is make things worse. Unfortunately, they are very good at doing that without even trying. All they have to do is something – anything. We would all be better off if they did absolutely nothing and were paid to stay home.

They cannot fail to fail when they do something. This is true even if the leaders are honest and honorable people. It is simply the nature of top down command and control. The details showing why this is so is much to much for a simple post on a blog.

but how could i not have posted this one with the Soweto link? the china reference says everything about the trip:

28 June: Orlando Sentinel: Today’s Buzz: Obama’s Africa trip: worth the cost?
Orlando Sentinel Editorial Board
Critics have seized on the cost of the trip, estimated at $60 million to $100 million because of extensive security requirements for presidential travel abroad. But supporters of the trip argue it’s important for Obama to personally emphasize America’s interest and engagement in Africa when China has been steadily increasing its influence on the continent. What do you think? Should Obama have scaled back, or canceled his trip? Should the U.S. concede Africa to the Chinese, and focus on other parts of the world, or concentrate on issues at home? Talk about it!…http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2013-06-28/news/os-todays-buzz-obamas-africa-trip-20130627_1_africa-trip-president-obama-worth-cost

If it were coal fired power plants, they would still be in operation and for another 15 plus years.

Altamont Pass.

Around 5,000 wind towers. Piddly little things, around 125KW each, the biggest ones. 576MW all up. Mostly rusting, mostly tethered throughout the year so they don’t spin, because spin is all they do, as they’ve in the main stopped generating any power many many years ago. 5000 towers. Some verdant sources surmise the output at around 1.1TWH. However, when they were actually working, back in 1985, they generated 700GWH per year at a CF of 14.3%.

Useless rusting metal.

Say, 700GWH a year. Around the same as Bayswater delivers in 11 days with all four units running.

2 July: ABC: Fruit growers get grant to find energy savings
Australian fruit growers have received a Federal Government grant to help identify energy savings in their farms and packing sheds…
The audits will take place across Australia in 10 regions, and APAL will partner with Summerfruit Australia and Cherry Growers Australia to get participants and conduct seminars over the next 18 months.
Dairy Australia also used a government grant to do energy audits on dairy farms…
Under the Clean Energy Futures program, farmers are not entitled to the Food and Foundries Grants, which have so far allocated $91 million to 170 companies, many in regional areas.
A total of $200 million was allocated under the Bill for food processors and packaging companies, to reduce their power bills and save on carbon emissions.
Cedar Meats exports mutton, lamb and veal from its processing plant in Melbourne. Two months ago, it got a $200,000 government grant, and invested an equal amount…
Add to that the largest grant so far, $23 million for Bindaree Beef at Inverell in NSW, to generate methane power from a waste collection pond.
The idea was that part of the money raised by taxing Australia’s largest polluters would be given to companies such as food processors and packagers, to help them reduce power bills by changing to LED lights, installing solar panels, switching to gas.
There are wineries, olive oil processors, regional ice-cream makers and dairy processors Parmalat, Fonterra and Alba cheese. Meat processor JBS in Queensland received $4 million for a biogas generator…
The Coalition would abolish these grants

“At the moment, 100 per cent of regional businesses pay the carbon tax. Aminor percentage get some sort of rebate from the government,” said the Coalition Climate Action spokesman Greg Hunt.
“Under us, none of them will have a carbon tax, and we’ll put in place an incentives-based scheme, for those firms who can improve their energy efficiency which can reduce their emissions. They will be in a position to sell that change to the government. We’ll provide incentives, not penalties.”…http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-03/fruit-energy-audits/4796638

and while the phony CAGW bureacrats run around the country, begging farmers to take grants to fix a phony problem:

3 July: ABC: Goulburn Valley growers at risk of suicide after losing supply contracts
Thousands of fruit trees, some almost a century old, are being ripped out of the ground in the Goulburn Valley, Victoria’s most productive fruit growing area.
Farmers say cheap imports are destroying the local industry and around Shepparton, one in five suppliers to the local cannery have revealed they are suffering from depression.
SPC Ardmona recently cut its intake of locally-sourced fruit, as the company struggles to compete with a influx of cheap imported fruit on supermarket shelves…
Some of their pear trees are 90 years old.
Mr Singh has lost his entire contract to supply fruit to the cannery and has already had more than 3,500 trees knocked down.
“This is really sad. You can see how healthy these trees are. They grow beautiful fruit. We just can’t sell it,” he said.
Right across the Goulburn Valley trees are being destroyed because of concerns about fruit fly.
John Wilson of the Victorian Fruit Growers Association says farmers are being urged to keep an eye on their mates because of the risk of suicide.
“Anyone that goes quiet, report it, don’t wait. It is a difficult time. Some people are really depressed about their future,” he said…http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-03/farmers-at-risk-of-suicide-after-losing-supply-contracts/4795684

But perhaps he believes that (1) the cause is more important than the lie and sees honour in his behaviour, or alternatively (2) he is able to erase the lie from his conscience and is unknowingly stumbling through his activist dystopia not seeing any contradictions.

A psychologist could answer that.

Or you could simply examine his past behaviour, impersonating a company executive to obtain confidential documents by deception.

Sadly, these “twits” are proving the movie Idiocracy is coming true, and poosibly in our lifetime!

Just yesterday several of us were speculating how long it would take for (at least the U. S. population, which seems to be leading the pack) the full effect of the ‘low-information voter’ to become the dominant force. I thought maybe a hundred years. Others thought a generation or less.

I take comfort that I will be gone when it happens, but I fear for my progeny.

I think worse; votes that are an instant reaction and not necessarily based on a truth. This could affect election outcomes by changing the demographics of voter turnout. It could be used to change peoples minds about a given candidate when there is no time left to even verify the veracity of the tweet. Instant propaganda reaching millions, for rumor driven voting. Scary.

Gleik tried to deflect away when I confronted him with the picture and a video of the car on fire. Then tried to say he didn’t mean anything.

Shea Gunther, who wrote the story that Gleik was linking to, attempted to insult me and then said that he wasn’t saying the melting was caused by “climate change”, despite having the tags “climate change” and “global warming” on the post.

I think Peter Glieck is trying to be the next Paul Ehrlich. Despite being spectacularly wrong, look at the awards and accolades eh rich has recieved:

Awards and honors[edit]

The John Muir Award of the Sierra Club
The Gold Medal Award of the World Wildlife Fund International
A MacArthur Prize Fellowship
The Crafoord Prize, awarded by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences and considered the highest award given in the field of ecology
ECI Prize winner in terrestrial ecology, 1993
A World Ecology Award from the International Center for Tropical Ecology, University of Missouri, 1993
The Volvo Environmental Prize, 1993
The United Nations Sasakawa Environment Prize, 1994
The 1st Annual Heinz Award in the Environment (with Anne Ehrlich), 1995[40]
The Albert Einstein Club Commemorative Plaque, 1997
The Tyler Prize for Environmental Achievement, 1998
The Dr A.H. Heineken Prize for Environmental Sciences, 1998
The Blue Planet Prize, 1999
The Eminent Ecologist Award of the Ecological Society of America, 2001
The Distinguished Scientist Award of the American Institute of Biological Sciences, 2001
Ramon Margalef Prize in Ecology and Environmental Sciences of the Generalitat of Catalonia, 2009.
Fellow of the Royal Society of London 2012 [1]

No wonder organized crime has infiltrated the carbon credit scheme. You get to sell hot air and, if Gleick is typical of climate criminal accountability, you can go on a crime spree and not worry about looking over your shoulder!

3 July: Guardian: Damian Carrington: Emissions trading reforms raise price of pollution permits
Critical reforms to Europe’s flagship scheme for cutting carbon emissions were passed for the first time on Wednesday in the European parliament. The move immediately caused the price of pollution permits, currently near rock bottom, to rise…
“The symbolic nature of this vote cannot be underestimated,” Rob Elsworth, from carbon trading thinktank Sandbag. “The parliament has shown that it sides with climate ambition and has silenced those looking to kill the EU carbon market.”…
EU commissioner for Climate Action Connie Hedegaard also welcomed the vote. “We must have a well-functioning carbon market to boost innovative low-carbon technologies in Europe,” he said.
Ed Davey, the UK’s energy and climate change secretary, said the vote was an important step forward. “We need a stable carbon market so we get a more certainty for investors so emissions reductions can be achieved at the lowest cost possible.”…
BNEF carbon analyst Konrad Hanschmidt said: “This was more bullish than the market had anticipated.” Nick Robins, at HSBC bank, said: “This will provide a modest – but temporary – boost to the market. More importantly, we expect that this will provide positive momentum for [future] structural reform of the ETS.”
The carbon price rose 10% to 4.75 Euros by mid-afternoon on Wednesday but remained about 50% down on its 12-month high of 9 Euros…
The EU’s four biggest nations – UK, France, Germany and Italy – and at least eight other member states are in favour of strengthening the EU emissions trading scheme, as are dozens of major companies including Shell, E.ON, SSE, ENEL, Unilever and Ikea.
David Hone, Shell’s chief climate change adviser, said: “The ETS is the most cost-effective approach to meeting Europe’s energy needs and reducing emissions over time. It is in urgent need of reform and backloading is an important first step.”
The reform was also opposed by MEPs in the Conservative EPP grouping, including all but one Conservative MEP who defied David Cameron to vote against the backloading. Cameron wanted an even more ambitious backloading, of 1,200m permits…
Wednesday’s reforms will mean backloading can only happen once before 2020.
Analysts believe the backloading of 900m permits could raise carbon prices to €15, but say prices above €20 are needed to give utilities sufficient incentive to make serious switches to lower carbon energy generation.
Greenpeace’s Joris den Blanken said: “The Parliament unexpectedly rejected a further weakening of the plan, but there is still not too much to celebrate. As soon as the suspended allowances are allowed to re-enter the system, the carbon market will be back to square one.” He said 2.2bn allowances must be cancelled before 2020 to restore the credibility of the ETS.http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/jul/03/emissions-trading-reforms-pollution-permits

3 July: Deutsche Welle: European Parliament votes to revamp emissions trading
Delegates in Strasbourg voted by 344 to 311 to back the delay, with carbon allowance prices having dropped to below 5 euros ($6.5).
The system, introduced in 2005, was designed so that power companies and large industrial concerns could trade carbon permits…
The decision was also praised by the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), who nevertheless added that more could be done. “The European Parliament has done the minimum to rescue the Emissions Trading System from redundancy,” Sam van den Plas, climate change policy officer for the World Wildlife Fund, said. “Member states should back further measures to eliminate these toxic tonnes permanently from the EU’s carbon market.”
However the Federation of German Industry (BDI) said that parliament’s decision “sent the wrong signal.”
“Instead of strengthening the European growth motor of industry, the approach of the EU is unsettling and irritating industry across Europe,” the BDI said.http://www.dw.de/european-parliament-votes-to-revamp-emissions-trading/a-16928165

3 July: ABC: Caddie Brain: Henbury carbon farm a waste of money
Northern Territory County Liberal Senator Nigel Scullion says the Federal Government’s investment in the purchase of Henbury Station was a complete waste of taxpayers’ money.
The property was purchased by R.M. Williams Agricultural Holdings two years ago, with $9 million of Federal funding, to destock the station for conservation purposes and farm carbon instead…
“The amount of money that was invested in this is just an absolute horror story.
“And of course you’ve encouraged a good business effectively to go broke.
“There’s no technology that’s been proved outside of a government doing this sort of stuff.”
The ABC understands Australian Rangelands Enterprises resubmitted a methodology for sequestering carbon in arid areas to the Domestic Offsets Integrity Committee for assessment last month.
Senator Scullion says despite the investment, there’s no market for carbon credits from Henbury.
“There isn’t even a market to sell the carbon on, unless you have a particular deal like the Arnhem Protocol (The West Arnhem Land Fire Abatement), which Conoco Phillips actually said ‘we’re going to buy carbon at $10 a tonne’…http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-03/nigel-scullion-henbury-rm-williams/4796232

3 July: ABC Rural: Rising carbon dioxide is greening deserts
Rising levels of carbon dioxide have increased vegetation growth in the world’s deserts by as much as 11 per cent over the last 30 years.
CSIRO, in collaboration with the Australian National University, used satellite records from arid areas of Australia, North America, Africa and the Middle East to assess changes in foliage growth.
Dr Randall Donohue says carbon dioxide increases the water efficiency of arid-zone plants.
“From 1982 to 2010, carbon dioxide levels have increase 14 per cent,” he said.
“It’s been understood for a while that plants do a lot better under elevated carbon dioxide levels.
“Carbon dioxide is an essential ingredient for plant growth, the more they have, generally the better they do.
“That means plants in dry places can end up being more water efficient, and can grow a little bit more for a given bit of rainfall…
“It will also have implications for carbon farming and carbon accounting, but a lot more research is needed to understand what these implications are.”http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-03/carbon-dioxide-increase-vegetation/4796990

There have been many properties purchased by Green groups too and being “returned to nature” creating safe havens for feral pests that cause damage to farming properties, potential bushfire risk and a loss of productive land from the food bowl.

3 July: ABC Rural: Flint Duxfield: Deep soil stores more carbon than thought
A joint Australian-UK study has found that deep soils store up to five times more carbon than previously thought.
The research, published in the journal Plant and Soil, shows carbon is stored at depths of up to 40 metres.
Professor Snow Barlow, from the National Climate Change Adaptation Facility, says the findings mean planting trees to sequester carbon may become a more profitable option for farmers…
The authors of the study have called for a reassessment of the current measurements used to judge soil carbon stores.
“This finding may have major implications for estimates of global carbon storage and modelling of the potential global impacts of climate change and land-use change on carbon cycles,” the paper says.http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-03/nrn-dist-deep-soil-carbon/4796166

3 July: Bloomberg: Alex Morales: UN Charts ‘Unprecedented’ Global Warming Since 2000
The planet has warmed faster since the turn of the century than ever recorded, almost doubling the pace of sea-level increase and causing a 20-fold jump in heat-related deaths, the United Nations said.
The decade through 2010 was the warmest for both hemispheres and for land and sea, the UN’s World Meteorological Organization said today in an e-mailed report examining climate trends for the beginning of the millennium. Almost 94 percent of countries logged their warmest 10 years on record, it said.
“The decadal rate of increase between 1991-2000 and 2001-2010 was unprecedented,” WMO Secretary-General Michel Jarraud said in a statement. “Rising concentrations of heat-trapping greenhouse gases are changing our climate, with far-reaching implications for our environment and our oceans.” …
Deaths from heatwaves surged to 136,000 in the 10-year period from fewer than 6,000 the previous decade, mainly a result of extreme temperatures in Europe in 2003 and in Russia in 2010, according to the WMO. A total of 511 disasters related to tropical cyclones killed 170,000 people and caused $380 billion of economic damage. Deaths from storms and floods fell…
The average global temperature for 2001-2010 was 14.47 degrees Celsius, according to the report. That’s 0.21 degree warmer than 1991-2000 and 0.79 degree warmer than 1881-1890. …
Sea levels rose at 3 millimeters (0.12 inch) a year, almost double the 20th-century rate of 1.6 millimeters a year…http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-03/un-charts-unprecedented-global-warming-since-2000.html

4 July: Bloomberg Slideshow: Tom Randall: Leaked! Proceedings of the Flat Earth Society
Click ahead to view items from the Flat Earth 2013 agenda, areas where public opinion and behavior pay little deference to the findings of pesky evidence-based science.
Note: this slideshow has no intentional relationship to organizations of real humans that may refer to themselves as the Flat Earth Society.http://www.bloomberg.com/slideshow/2013-07-03/flat-earth-society-s-2013-agenda.html

3 July: NYT: Stanley Reed: Europe Acts to Support Emissions Trading System
Among those opposed were the governments of Poland and the Czech Republic, which were wary of the plan’s impact on their energy-intensive industries. A large, moderate group, the European People’s Party, was divided, leading many of its members to abstain…
But analysts say that a price of 30 euros per ton or higher is needed to persuade companies to switch to cleaner fuels like natural gas, the main alternative to coal for generating electric power. Coal use in Europe boomed last year…
“I think the backloading itself will have limited impact on prices because the market remains significantly oversupplied,” said Roland Vetter, head of research at CF Partners, a carbon trading firm based in London.
In addition, there are still negotiations with Europe’s national governments and other hurdles to clear before the changes are implemented, perhaps in the early part of next year. “This is a marathon, not a sprint, so today is not the end of the story,” said Miles Austin, the executive director of the Climate Markets & Investment Association, an industry group based in London.
Business groups, some of which had lobbied against the measure, were critical of what they described as European Union interference in a market system.
“Even a one-off intervention undermines the principles of the Emissions Trading System and will make it more difficult for businesses to produce cost-effectively in the E.U.,” said Arnaldo Abruzzini, secretary general of Eurochambres, which represents European chambers of commerce, in a statement…
But the world’s pioneering carbon market has a pulse again. Among supporters of carbon trading there is now hope that Europe will in a couple of years adopt structural changes that would lead to permanently higher prices…
The simplest overall change that would raise the price would be to “reduce the cap,” or permanently reduce the number of allowances available, according to Robert N. Stavins, director of the Harvard Environmental Economics Program.
But such a move “is very difficult to do at a time like this,” he said. With Europe mired in recession, politicians do not want to saddle Europe-based companies with even higher costs, especially considering that their American competitors are benefiting from lower energy prices thanks to the recent boom in discoveries of shale gas.
Also, the United States seems to have more or less permanently rejected a cap-and-trade system after the House of Representatives passed one in 2009 that later died in the Senate. For some businesses, that left the European system looking like yet another burdensome and costly regulatory initiative.
“Europe thought it would take the lead and the U.S. would follow,” Mr. Stavins said. Instead, the United States rejected cap and trade, “and that is troubling and affecting the cost of production of carbon-intensive services in Europe,” he said.
Still, Mr. Stavins said that countries like Australia, New Zealand, Japan and China, as well as Quebec and the state of California, are all experimenting to various degrees with systems like the one Europe has adopted.
“The reality is that cap and trade, whether one likes it or not, is the preferred instrument of countries taking serious action on climate change,” he said.http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/04/business/global/european-parliament-acts-to-support-emissions-trading-system.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

I can’t get enough of this guy. I believe Peter is a very astute individual who fully understands the huge holes in the Global Warming theory but realises that the only way to destroy it is from within the inner circle, hence his idiotic behaviour. The man is my hero for making such a sacrifice and purposely looking like an idiot to advance the skeptic cause.

When it comes down to it, the first law of sustainability is ‘economic’ viability followed closely by the second law, ‘political will’. The second law is dependent (in a democracy) on the will of the people.

C/AGW or CC balloonists broke the first law and are irretrievably engaged in breaking the second law. They can’t help themselves. Whether the current socialist green elite are elected politicians, institutionlised bureaucrats, or comfortable academics their collective lifespan is diminishing daily.

Their ALPBC midday news today: global warming continues as temperature rises over the past decade and since records were first maintained. Death Valley in the US has reached intolerable highs. A UN spokesman told viewers that the situation is worsening. He sounded desperate.

I asked the question here. But since the source is the UK, why has the Australian papers not picked up on the story? The answer for the American ones is simple – they knew the connection long ago, but are still trying to hide it.

Hobart Examiner today is reporting this decade as the hottest ever on record. One of the laughable stats would have to be “most severe storms (cyclones/tornadoes) since 1855. Then goes on to use the usual sources to state that its all due to “dangerous levels of greenhouse gasses”

So how is it that no one in that newspaper has the wit, to even think to themselves “hmmm so if there was as many or more storms in 1855 and now we have 170 years more GHG in the atmosphere and we just equaled that record, doesnt that kind of suggest GHG’s would have nothing to with it ? or what caused the first record ?”

Then when you consider the reporting rate and accuracy of that data in 1855 would have been lets say “questionable”, its actually AMAZING…. nay UNBELIEVABLE, that with 170 years more GHG in the atmosphere and with a massively higher rate and accuracy of reporting that we only just matched that record.

Id have to say its almost a rock solid argument that GHG’s have nothing whatsoever to do with either climate change or the frequency and severity of storms, but I guess in this pseudo scientific belief system that is climate religion, anything is believable when everything is possible. CO2 causes more rain, less rain, no rain, record rain and record drought, its a miracle gas to be sure.

Someone here wondered how soon it would be before someone blamed the deaths in Arizona of the firefighters on Climate Change/Global Warming.

Not very long really.

A leftist radio jock in the U.S. said the following:

When those brave firefighters are laid to rest later this week, their funeral costs are most likely gonna be paid for by their family members, and that should not be the case, because it was the fossil-fuel industry in this country that killed these men, and the fossil-fuel industry should be responsible for paying for their funerals.

These deaths are just the latest example of the overwhelming negative externalities associated with America’s addiction to toxic and dirty fossil fuels. A negative externality — this is fancy economic-speak — it’s a cost borne by all of us that was produced by a private entity and then dumped on us.

Read the originating article that has audio of this moron, umm, truth teller at the following link.

As a safety professional I am always conducting investigations in to “root causes” and I would be really dissapointed to see the root cause of their deaths as “coal mining” or “peoples addiction to long Sunday drives”

Treble Cone and Roundhill have been blanketed in two metres of snow while snowfall at Mt Hutt is said by Tourism NZ “to have broken all reliable records” with three and half metres on the upper slopes and three at the base.

Well yes Dave. You see, Global Warming causes more evaporation, which means more clouds which, no wait…. more clouds would cool the earth…. oh, just ignore that fact…. yes, and, and more clouds means more precipitation and we all know that snow is precipitation.

1 July: Guardian: Lisa Caripis: Carbon pricing, one year on: independent expertise is crucial
Climate change is too important a topic to leave to politicians. Canberra should listen to the real experts – the Climate Change Authority
Some of Australia’s leading experts from business, science and ethics sit on its board…
On the other side of the political spectrum, things look even grimmer. If elected, the Abbott-led Coalition intends to abolish the Climate Change Authority entirely (along with the carbon pricing mechanism, a range of other clean energy measures and the Climate Commission – the body established to provide all Australians with an independent and reliable source of information about climate change science).
Australians respect the role and advice of independent expertise in other priority areas, like Australia’s monetary policy (Reserve Bank), economic policy (Productivity Commission), health (National Health and Medical Research Council) and national water reform (National Water Commission). Are we really prepared to accept our leaders marginalising, or indeed abolishing, climate expertise?
Bodies known for their conservatism – the World Bank, the International Energy Agency and companies like PricewaterhouseCoopers – have reviewed the best available science and are united: we’re on a collision course with climate catastrophe…
Policy-makers and theorists have a word for these kinds of issues. They call them “wicked problems”. And climate change is the wickedest problem we face today. The wickedest problems call for the wisest counsel. That’s unlikely to be found on the floor of parliament. What we need are impartial experts. But we also need leaders who are willing to listen.http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/01/carbon-tax-anniversary-climate-change-authority

This is good, the more these jerks make complete dorks of themselves the better. I believe there are times when all you need to do to win an argument is to just shut up. This is one of those rare instances.

Just watched, for the first time in quite a few years, ABC ‘Catalyst’.
Unsurprising to see the ABC hasn’t changed much in that time. All about ‘chaotic’ climate. Half truths upon lies. Compounded. To give them their due, I don’t think they mentioned CO2 once, although they did finish with the obligatory images of stacks venting steam and ominous mention of “emissions”.

On a different tack, interestingly, the 7.30 Report still clings fondly to the memory of the carcass of Gillard and has starting undermining Rudd.

But let’s not close the ABC down, the last thing we need is another insipid commercial channel. Just get out the snivelling lefties and establish a solid, balanced administration.

Agreed. I ended up watching Catalyst last night after some years as their “ad” for it was

“Weird weather – Climate Change or something else?”

I thought for a moment that they finally got off the green bandwagon and had a serious discussion, however it turned out to be shriller than ever, proving the dogma is dying.

At one point, some “scientist” was saying that the Northern jet stream was meandering more in recent years and therefore slowing transit of high and low pressures across continents. The implication though was that we were to blame – how this was even possible they didn’t say.

I used to watch Catalyst all the time, but since their green rhetoric dressed up as science started to appear it’s been shelved in my house.

Off-topic, but related – you lot in Oz should be grateful you’ve only got a Carbon Tax to deal with…
Here in Blighty we are closing electricity generating capacity at a rate of knots because the EU TELLS US TO…
End result – we are close to having power cuts – cue pantomime dialogue with the Department of Energy and (snigger) Climate Change:
‘Oh, no we’re not…’
Us: ‘Oh, yes we are…’
Solution – the NHS are being quietly asked to run their standby diesel generators in the event that supplies get a bit delicate..
See what a wonderful ‘post-industrial’ country we live in..?

For me it’s still July 4th and today is Independence Day here in the United States. It’s a particularly poignant celebration to those of us who follow politics and current events. But no lamenting the current situation today. Here’s a man who offers some hope.

He’s running for Lieutenant Governor of Virginia and he’s stuck his thumb squarely in Obama’s eye with this speech. He reminds me of another Virginian who stood before the Virginia Legislature on March 23, 1775 and stuck his thumb squarely in the eye of King George.

As our liberties erode more and more, Patrick Henry’s speech, particularly the ending line, inspires me more than ever before.

I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!

The whole speech is online in any number of places as are the speeches and writings of all our great men. This is perhaps a good opportunity to acquaint or reacquaint ourselves with our foundation as a nation.

Have a Happy Fourth of July. And as you celebrate, think about our current situation and pray for more men and women with the conviction and the courage of E. W. Jackson.

Hi Roy, we saw the movie “Lincoln” recently and were very impressed, have you seen it and could you give a perception of how Americans received the film?
I found it refreshing that Hollywood could produce a patriotic film considering the political left leaning tripe produced out of LA in recent years (and the past), or is there a twisted truth anywhere in the story portrayed?
I hope more good men and women come forward to help get America back on track.
Have a great 4th of July and try to behave yourself

Yes I saw “Lincoln”. I think it was well received but we must remember something about the film and the Hollywood attitude. The movie dealt only with a small issue, the political fight to end slavery. This is something the political left will always applaud, even exploit if they can.

I’m not a sufficient historian to tell you how accurate the movie is. But it was given high marks by those who should know. I do suspect some poetic license as is always the case.

I also suspect that the population that most needs to understand Lincoln, the man and his presidency, may not have bothered to buy a ticket.

The plain truth about Lincoln and the Civil War is that he fought to preserve the union. Any movement toward ending slavery (to which he was utterly opposed) was so much to the better. But even if he thought there was no way the war would end slavery he would still have fought because preserving the United States intact was his overriding goal. The Constitution provides no means for a state to leave the union. The individual states may be sovereign within their borders to a very large extent but they are part of a larger whole. And once in, there is no way out.

This is the opinion of historians who know much more about Lincoln than I do. It’s not me reading something into the man’s motivation that wasn’t there.

I suspect you’re right. But don’t you get tired of reading about the nonsense? Obama’s decision to go ahead and bypass Congress using rule making by the EPA to “combat global warming” is hardly a slow news day in the “climate crisis”. It’s a monumental declaration of contempt for the Constitution, the rule of law and the whole structure of the United States Government, not to mention contempt for the 330 plus million people he pretends to govern.

Surely that is more newsworthy than Peter Gleick. I realize Jo must concentrate on Australian politics. But the climate change crisis is very real, it’s worldwide and it’s destroying people’s livelihoods and their lives. This blog is the major player in the fight against the corruption and dishonesty.

Rudd is about to announce that the carbon price or carbon dioxide tax will move to emissions trading earlier than planned, and of course tied to the EU collapsing scheme. Handing over control to the EU. Sovereign nation Australia?

It’s worth reminding people again about what comes hand in glove with an ETS.

Cap and Trade.

This is the prefect way to lower emissions raise money.

The Government sets an upper limit on CO2 emissions, and here, I’ll use the example of a coal fired power plant.

That upper limit will be set artificially low, not based on what the average power generation but lower, because after all it’s supposed to lower emissions, isn’t it.

So, the plant can generate electricity up to the amount of that upper limit.

They have to purchase credits from the Government to cover those emissions, and at the end of the year, they have to hand back those credits, the same number as they had to purchase on day one.

During the year, they can trade these credits at regulated auctions, buying or selling, but in the knowledge that they have to hand that same number back. Any excess will be put towards the following year’s total.

At the end of year one, and for each year after that, their emissions cap is then lowered by a government set percentage, hence they can now only generate less electricity, and by extrapolation get less back from the sale of that electricity.

Now, pretend that the power generating entity actually generates more electricity than the cap allows, say, a heat wave or a long cold spell, or if other plants are unexpectedly off line, and don’t say this cannot happen, because just witness what happened in South Australia in May and June.

If they exceed their cap, and here we’re talking not piddling amounts because a large scale plant emits 50,000 tons + of CO2 each day, so even extra hours are costly, and even at the low European cost of $10 or so per ton, there’s half a million dollars a day.

If they exceed the cap, then they have to purchase the extra credits to cover that extra, purchasing them at the most recent highest cost for credits.

Then, ON TOP OF THAT, they are further penalised by a cost of 1.5 times those excess emissions credits, again at that same most recent highest cost.

Then, ON TOP OF THAT AGAIN, the excess is then subtracted from their now lowered target for the upcoming year.

This is not recipe to lower emissions.

It’s a money making scam, and on top of that, a recipe for blackouts, because as soon as a generating entity looks like its cap will be breached, then you tell me what they are going to do.

Smaller plants that only operate for a few hours a day, as they were specifically designed to do, and as shown by what happened in South Australia will go to the wall quicker than you can blink if the same situation happens again, and don’t say it won’t. It happened not just for five days as it did in the recent Summer, but for 15 days in May, and 11 days in June.

So Tony if Rudd brings in the ETS early (i assume after the election) and makes no changes to its operation will the ETS affect the power companies in its first year or do you see the ETS effecting power generation in a few years time?

To pose the question another way if Rudd wins then brings the ETS in before Christmas will we have rolling blackouts within his 3 year term of office or for the following governments 3 year term (2017-2020)

Northern, the last remaining coal fired plant will have a cap, and as they are already struggling, mainly due to the plant’s old age, and nothing done to replace those old plants there, eg, Playford closed completely, then Northern will have problems staying in operation.

Now, that means South Australia has to get its power from somewhere, and what they’ve been doing is getting those smaller, (short operation plants) to run for extended periods.

Their cap is set at normal opertion, so they’ll be tapped out really soon.

South Australia has the interchange from Victoria, and that is all coal fired power being supplied into South Australia. Victoria’s plants will have their set caps, so supplying just Victoria comes first, so South Australia will be either way down the list, or “sorry mate, nothing here.”

When the wind stops, then the power just goes out too.

There’ll be sorry mate’s from everywhere the grid controllers ring in desperation.

Then, why would you even consider opening a new power plant at all, when your ability to sell the power is lowered every year.

Existing plants will supply until their contract runs out or when the cap gets so low that it’s just better to shut down.

Then, there will be no power at all.

I can see some plants with a number of units just shutting down one or more units permanently.

There’s NOTHING to replace that lost power.

You guess what will happen.

New plants take up to five years from proposal till power delivery, and that’s if all the ducks line up first time around, and that applies with renewable plants as well.

The small plants will go first.

True, it will lower power consumption, but only because there is the distinct possibility that power will be rationed. Industry will have the first priority, commerce next, and Residential last, and the first cut off.

Then watch the screaming from rooftop panel owners, because any power cuts, and their systems are taken off line too. So the Sun can be shining brightly, and those homes will have no power.

It will not be pretty.

Rudd will be long gone by then, and all the rest will just be pointing fingers.

Is this scaremongering on my part? Not on your life.

Oh, by the way, Rudd can’t move away from the existing CO2 Tax and move it straight to an ETS, as Parliament has risen. All he can do is take it to the election as a promise.

Tony my question was, in the first year of ETS does the cap stay at what they emit now or is the first years cap lower than what they emit now?

If it is lower then i expect the bovine excrement to hit the fan whilst Rudd is still here (or whoever knifes him next) either way we will get very high electricty price increases.

You can cheat the system with roof top solar by getting a waveform generator to produce 50Hz (on batteries) this will trick your solar system into thinking it is grid connected thats if it just sniffs the power and looks for the frequency if you need high current as well then you are stuffed i need to have a closer look to be sure.

Cap and Trade, when implemented, starts at the emissions levels from the previous year.

You also say here:

You can cheat the system with roof top solar by getting a waveform generator to produce 50Hz (on batteries) this will trick your solar system into thinking it is grid connected thats if it just sniffs the power and looks for the frequency if you need high current as well then you are stuffed i need to have a closer look to be sure.

Distributed generators must detect islanding and immediately stop feeding the utility lines with power. This is known as anti-islanding. A grid-tied solar power system is required by law to have a gridtie inverter with an anti-islanding function, which senses when a power outage occurs and shuts itself off.

You mentioned batteries in brackets, and that’s the only way to still have power, but I would hazard a guess that less than one tenth of one percent or even less would have any battery backup at all, let alone a specifically designed full scale correct battery backup. The cost is prohibitive. Then why bother with battery back up at all for a grid feed in in system, just go off grid solar, provided the local authority will allow that, that is. Then the cost does become prohibitive, hence it’s the option least mentioned.

You mentioned batteries in brackets, and that’s the only way to still have power, but I would hazard a guess that less than one tenth of one percent or even less would have any battery backup at all, let alone a specifically designed full scale correct battery backup. The cost is prohibitive. Then why bother with battery back up at all for a grid feed in in system, just go off grid solar, provided the local authority will allow that, that is. Then the cost does become prohibitive, hence it’s the option least mentioned.

Tony.

Tony you misunderstood, the batteries are to supply a voltage to run your waveform generator, a small hand held device that can produce a 50Hertz sinewave. This sinewave will make your inverter think you have mains power supplied as i believe all it does is sniff the mains (it does not require the 10amps of actual current). Then your solar panels will work even when there is no power.

.
1) – A $400 million recruitment drive for Greenpeace and the WWF.
2) – $10 million pork-barrel bribe for farmers.
3) – A $15.00 per tonne ETS.
4) – Another nine expensive recruitment drives for Greenpeace and the WWF.
5) – A few more million to “save” the Great Barrier Reef from whatever the current threat is.
6) – Another seven expensive recruitment drives for Greenpeace and the WWF.
7) – $1 billion for the one million solar roofs program.
8) – $100 million for the solar towns program.
9) – A $10.5 billion “emissions reduction scheme”.
10) – $10 million to create “clean energy jobs” (whatever they are).
11) – $50 million to create “geothermal” and “tidal power” towns.
12) – $5 million to research “renewable fuels” (whatever they are).
13) – $10 million to restore the “greenhouse friendly program” (whatever that is.
14) – $2 million to build “smart grids” (whatever they are) to distribute all the “green” power.
15) – Yet another expensive recruitment drive for Greenpeace and the WWF.
16) – Continued support for the 20% by 2020 Renewable Energy Target Scheme.
17) – A million or so to save the whales (and dolphins).
18) – $116.5 million to convince us all to drink storm drainage water rather than build dams.
19) – $751 million for yet another shonky “save the Murray Darling Basin” plan, based on shonky BoM data.

.
That is, in fact, the Coalition’s Environment Policy (link here). However, their energy policy (such as it is) is mixed in there. In short, more of the same “green” expensive 19th century crap that doesn’t actually generate electricity in usable amounts anyway.

Note the http://www.liberal.org.au part. That is the URL of the Liberal Party of Australia. If you click on it, it will take you to their home page.

The document is the current Liberal Party Environment Policy as available for download from THEIR official site.

TODAY.

NOW.

.
It is irrelevant what you and others have convinced yourselves of regarding the Liberal’s intentions once they are elected. It is irrelevant what you may believe Abbott, Hunt and the rest may have hinted at recently.

All you can ultimately hold them to, is their written policy..

And their written policy is just more of the same green waffle that is currently sending the country broke, and forcing pensioners to choose between food or heating.

3 July: ABC: Doubts over Hydro’s carbon tax windfall
The state-owned Hydro Tasmania is currently reaping the benefits of the carbon tax by selling clean energy to interstate customers via Basslink.
Analyst Stephen Weston says the company stored up reserves before the Gillard Government introduced the carbon tax and is now generating power at unprecedented levels…
Mr Weston says that under that plan, Hydro’s profits would take a hit.
“That would result in a carbon price much lower than the fixed carbon price, so we’re talking about the carbon price falling from something like $23, $24 a tonne, down to perhaps $10 a tonne,” he said.
“Then those low carbon prices would persist until either Europe gets its act together, or we get some kind of international agreement.”
Hydro Tasmania recently revised down its forecast revenue from the carbon tax.http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-03/doubts-over-hydro27s-carbon-tax-windfall/4796184?section=tas

Spain still undecided on support for EU carbon market
MADRID, July 4 (Reuters) – Spain has yet to decide whether to endorse plans to prop up the EU carbon market and instructed its politicians to abstain in a vote on Wednesday that backed the proposal, a senior Spanish government official said…http://www.pointcarbon.com/news/reutersnews/1.2447046?&ref=searchlist

TABLE-MEPs from big EU nations split on CO2 backloading: data
LONDON, July 4 (Reuters Point Carbon) – Lawmakers from some of Europe’s biggest countries remain divided over an EU Commission proposal to prop up depressed carbon prices by cutting permit supply in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, voting results from a parliamentary ballot on Wednesday showed…http://www.pointcarbon.com/news/1.2447089?&ref=searchlist

EUAs dip 2.8 pct in muted trade after CO2 fix vote
LONDON, July 4 (Reuters Point Carbon) – EU carbon edged down 2.8 percent on Thursday on thin volume as traders were reluctant to take on large positions on a U.S. holiday and following a wild session on Wednesday, when EU Parliament voted to temporarily choke permit supply…http://www.pointcarbon.com/news/1.2447597?&ref=searchlist

EU climate chief says high CO2 price to drive IT, health jobs
LONDON, July 4 (Reuters Point Carbon) – EU Climate Commissioner Connie Hedegaard said Thursday that higher carbon prices would drive job creation across industry sectors as broad as health and IT, as she tried to fend off concerns that a resulting hike in energy prices could add to the EU’s jobless figure…http://www.pointcarbon.com/news/1.2447613?&ref=searchlist

“CO2 developer”?

Africa CO2 developer inks CDM deal, says more to come
LONDON, July 4 (Reuters Point Carbon) – Ecosur afrique has signed a contract to sell 2.2 million African CO2 offsets over the next seven years to an unnamed European utility, its CEO said on Thursday, calling it an “opportune” time to invest in a market that many firms are exiting…http://www.pointcarbon.com/news/1.2447588?&ref=searchlist

3 July: Bloomberg: Jim Snyder: Obama Revamps $8 Billion Coal Program Amid Objections
Federal loan guarantees are intended to quiet objections to Obama’s climate plans, said Michael McKenna, a Republican political strategist and lobbyist with MWR Strategies Inc. in Midlothian, Virginia.
The money can “help those who care about coal pretend that this administration can be negotiated with,” McKenna said in an e-mail.
He said carbon-capture technology hasn’t been shown to be economically efficient…
China and India both rely even more heavily on coal as they try to meet the needs of their expanding economies.
“For both political and policy reasons, Democrats have been trying to find a way to get clean coal into the long-term energy mix,” said Bledsoe, who’s now a senior fellow for energy and climate at the German Marshall Fund of the United States, a Washington-based group that seeks to strengthen transatlantic cooperation. “Not only because the U.S. needs it, but primarily for use in developing countries over time.” http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-03/obama-revamps-8-billion-coal-program-amid-objections.html

Yeah you have to giggle. When believers trashed “The Great Global Warming Swindle” and its assertions that AGW is nothing more than a plot by white westerners to keep the “brown man” down, who knew it would be the “brown man” keeping the “brown men” down. Truth can truly be stranger than fiction.

Well if we’re just making causes up I’d like to throw in the “Yonniestone International Personal Protection from Every Environmentalist”
or YIPPEE for short and it’ll only cost 1 billion AUD, don’t worry it’s going to a good cause.